I.M.P.A.C.T. Church Empowerment Program

A partnership with Pastor Lee Jenkins, the Stewardship Coach, and Allan Bell - CPA, CMA, MBA, Nsites founder and creator

M4 Marketing · Lesson 2 of 4

Lesson 2 — Brand and Digital Front Door

Evaluate the church's website, search presence, social channels and visual identity for clarity and trust, and produce a First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit with a barrier log.

Not started

Nine M curriculum version 1.0 · Nine M methodology, content, exercises and deliverables by Pastor Lee Jenkins.

Where this lesson sits

Curriculum version 1.0 · Pastor Lee Review

Module purpose: Align the church's public identity, message, digital presence, communications, and community awareness with its mission.

Official outcome: Church Marketing and Communications Plan

This lesson produces: First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit with barrier log, covering mobile and desktop

Anything you type is kept in this browser session only. This prototype does not save to a server.

Learn

Participant study reading — approximately 75 minutes of learning and shared work.

Learning objective: Evaluate the church's website, search presence, social channels and visual identity for clarity and trust, and produce a First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit with a barrier log.

Recommended participants: Senior leadership, communications volunteer or staff lead, someone comfortable navigating phones and browsers for the live walkthrough

Estimated teaching time: 75 minutes

Success indicators

  • • Leadership has personally navigated the website and search listings as a first-time visitor would, on both mobile and desktop
  • • A barrier log names specific points of confusion or friction with severity ratings
  • • Visual identity inconsistencies across channels have been documented
  • • Priority fixes are ranked and ready to feed the module's 90-day action plan

Materials and evidence you will use

  • • The church's live website on mobile and desktop
  • • The church's search engine listing (search the church name and see what appears)
  • • The church's active social media profiles
  • • Any printed or digital brand guide, if one exists
  • • At least eight barriers logged across search, website and social channels
  • • Severity ratings and proposed fixes for each barrier

What you should be able to produce

  • • Leadership has personally navigated the website and search listings as a first-time visitor would, on both mobile and desktop
  • • A barrier log names specific points of confusion or friction with severity ratings
  • • Visual identity inconsistencies across channels have been documented
  • • Priority fixes are ranked and ready to feed the module's 90-day action plan

Foundational ministry principle

Luke 14:28-30

28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? 29 Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, 30 Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish.

King James Version (KJV) · Public domain

Jesus tells the parable of the builder who counts the cost before building a tower, so the work is not left half-finished for others to see and judge.

As a draft connection for review, this passage frames the digital audit as counting the cost honestly: better to see clearly where the church's online front door is unfinished now than to let a visitor discover it first and draw conclusions about the whole church.

Understand the concept

Your work in this lesson focuses on this outcome: Evaluate the church's website, search presence, social channels and visual identity for clarity and trust, and produce a First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit with a barrier log.

The digital front door forms a first impression long before the physical one does; auditing it honestly is an act of hospitality toward people we haven't met yet.

Why it matters for your church

Someone needs a standing responsibility to check the website and search listing accuracy on a schedule.

Volunteers producing social content may need a simple style reference to keep visuals consistent.

Fixing basic barriers like outdated service times often costs nothing but has been quietly turning visitors away.

Examine the evidence

Use The church's live website on mobile and desktop, The church's search engine listing (search the church name and see what appears), The church's active social media profiles, and Any printed or digital brand guide, if one exists to compare your church's present practice with its stated intentions. Look for documented patterns, missing information, and differences between what people assume and what the evidence supports.

Your completed work should be supported by At least eight barriers logged across search, website and social channels, and Severity ratings and proposed fixes for each barrier. Record uncertainty honestly so your team knows what still needs to be verified.

Prepare for the shared exercise

Document specific barriers a first-time visitor would encounter across the church's website, search listing, social channels and visual identity. The First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit produces the First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit with barrier log, covering mobile and desktop, which contributes to the module's principal deliverable.

Before working with your team, consider this reflection: What would a stranger conclude about our church after sixty seconds on our website, and is that conclusion accurate?

Key terms

Digital front door
The website, search listing and social media profiles a first-time visitor encounters before ever physically arriving at the church.
Barrier log
A documented list of specific points of confusion or friction a visitor could encounter, each rated by severity.
Brand consistency
The degree to which visual identity (logo, colors, photography) and verbal tone match across every channel a visitor might encounter.

What this means for a church

  • • Someone needs a standing responsibility to check the website and search listing accuracy on a schedule
  • • Volunteers producing social content may need a simple style reference to keep visuals consistent
  • • Fixing basic barriers like outdated service times often costs nothing but has been quietly turning visitors away

Common failure patterns

  • • Auditing only the desktop website and never checking the mobile experience
  • • Assuming the website is fine because staff, who already know the information, can find what they need
  • • Fixing visual design without checking whether basic practical information is accurate

Ministry case

The Service Time That Was Wrong for a Year

A growing church changed its Sunday service time but never updated its search engine listing. For nearly a year, anyone searching the church's name saw the old time. Leadership only discovered this when a first-time guest arrived forty minutes late and mentioned it awkwardly to a greeter.

During their digital audit, the team found the same outdated information in three other places: an old flyer still indexed online, a community calendar listing, and a directory site none of them remembered creating an account with. Correcting all four took less than an hour, but the team estimated they had likely lost multiple visitors over the previous year to that single, invisible error.

Lesson takeaway

The digital front door forms a first impression long before the physical one does; auditing it honestly is an act of hospitality toward people we haven't met yet.

Discuss

Guided discussion for the leadership table.

With the barriers we just observed still fresh, let's convert this walkthrough into a formal audit document with a ranked barrier log we can act on.

  1. What barrier did we find that has likely been costing us visitors without our knowledge?
  2. Where does our online presence look inconsistent or out of date compared to who we actually are today?
  3. If a visitor gave up trying to find our service time, would we ever know?
  4. Who should own keeping our digital front door accurate going forward?

Practice

Applied exercise — produces the First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit with barrier log, covering mobile and desktop.

First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit

Document specific barriers a first-time visitor would encounter across the church's website, search listing, social channels and visual identity.

Estimated time: 40 minutes

Participants: Leadership team with at least one person navigating live on mobile and desktop

Artifact produced: First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit with barrier log, covering mobile and desktop

Required inputs

  • • Live access to the church website on mobile and desktop
  • • The church's current search engine listing
  • • Active social media profiles

Instructions

  1. Search the church's name as a stranger would and record the first three results that appear
  2. Navigate the website on a phone, noting load time, ease of finding service times and address, and any confusing menus
  3. Repeat the same navigation on a desktop or laptop and note any differences
  4. Review social media profiles for posting frequency, accuracy of information and visual consistency with the website
  5. Compare colors, logo usage and photography style across all channels and note inconsistencies
  6. Log each barrier found with a description, the device or channel it occurred on, and a severity rating
  7. Rank the barrier log from highest to lowest severity and identify the top three priority fixes
Complete it online

First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit and Barrier Log

  • Church name: ______________________
  • Audit date: ______________________
  • Devices used: ______________________
Channel or deviceBarrier observedLikely visitor impactSeverity (High/Medium/Low)Proposed fix
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

Worked example

A fully completed sample using a fictional church. This is illustrative teaching material, not any church's actual data.

Northgate Community Church (illustrative example — not actual church data)

Northgate's team conducted a live walkthrough using one phone and one laptop, searching the church name and navigating the website and social profiles as a stranger would.

Channel or deviceBarrier observedLikely visitor impactSeverity (High/Medium/Low)Proposed fix
Search listingOld address from a previous building location still appearsVisitor could drive to the wrong locationHighUpdate search listing and any linked directories with current address
Website, mobileService times require three taps to find, buried in a dropdown menuVisitor may give up before finding basic informationHighMove service times to the homepage header
Social mediaLast post was eleven weeks agoChurch may appear inactive or closedMediumAssign a volunteer to post weekly, even briefly
Website vs. socialLogo color differs between website (blue) and social profile (green)Visitor may not recognize the church as the same organization across channelsMediumStandardize logo file and color across all channels

How this leadership team reasoned

  • • The team was surprised the outdated address appeared first in search results, since no one had checked in over a year
  • • They noted the mobile experience was significantly harder to navigate than desktop, which most staff use
  • • They agreed inconsistent branding was lower urgency than the wrong address but still worth fixing this quarter

Decisions recorded

  • • Assigned the communications volunteer to correct the search listing and directory address within the week
  • • Moved service times to the homepage header on both mobile and desktop
  • • Created a shared logo and color file for anyone producing social content going forward

Completed artifact extract — First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit with barrier log, covering mobile and desktop

First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit — Northgate Community Church Top priority: Outdated address in search listing (High severity) — corrected within one week, owner: communications volunteer. Second priority: Service times buried in mobile navigation (High severity) — moved to homepage header. Third priority: Inactive social media presence (Medium severity) — weekly posting assigned to volunteer team. Fourth priority: Inconsistent brand colors across channels (Medium severity) — standardized logo file created and distributed.

Illustrative exercise score: 18 of 20. The audit covered both mobile and desktop, search and social, with severity ratings and named owners for each fix, though the social media fix could specify a more concrete posting schedule.

Score

Transparent 20-point exercise rubric: four criteria rated 0 to 5 with observable anchors.

Criterion0 — not evident3 — acceptable5 — exemplarySample
Completeness (0–5)No channels or devices were actually checkedOnly the website was audited, with no search listing or social media reviewWebsite, search listing and social channels were all audited on both mobile and desktop with a ranked barrier log5
Use of evidence (0–5)Barriers listed are assumptions rather than things actually observed during the walkthroughSome barriers are directly observed but severity ratings are not clearly justifiedEvery barrier is directly observed during the live walkthrough with a clear, specific description of visitor impact5
Alignment to the module purpose (0–5)The audit focuses only on aesthetics with no attention to trust or clarity for a first-time visitorThe audit addresses some functional barriers but misses the trust-building purpose of consistent identityThe audit addresses both functional barriers and brand consistency, connecting both to visitor trust4
Actionability and ownership (0–5)No fixes are proposed or assignedFixes are proposed but no owner or timeframe is attached to any of themEvery high-severity barrier has a proposed fix, a named owner and an implied or stated timeframe4
Worked sample total18 / 20
  • Completeness: Northgate covered search, website on two devices, and social media, with a ranked list.
  • Use of evidence: Each row describes a specific observed barrier with a concrete visitor impact statement.
  • Alignment to the module purpose: The audit connects functional and brand issues to visitor experience, though the trust rationale could be stated more explicitly for each row.
  • Actionability and ownership: High-severity items have clear owners and timing, though medium-severity fixes lack specific due dates.

Lesson-exercise scores (20 points each) demonstrate learning and artifact quality. They do not automatically overwrite the official Nine M module assessment, which remains a separate 100-point rating of five module dimensions.

Submit evidence

What must be submitted for this lesson to count as complete.

Submit

  • • Completed digital audit worksheet with barrier log
  • • List of top three priority fixes ranked by severity

Attach this evidence

  • At least eight barriers logged across search, website and social channels
  • Severity ratings and proposed fixes for each barrier

File upload is not implemented in this prototype. Ticking a box records that the church can produce the document; it does not store a file.

Contribute to official outcome

How this lesson builds the Church Marketing and Communications Plan.

Artifact produced: First-Time-Visitor Digital Audit with barrier log, covering mobile and desktop

Forms the brand and digital audit section of the Church Marketing and Communications Plan and feeds priority items into the 90-day action plan.

Open the module deliverable assembly

Participant reflection and notes

What would a stranger conclude about our church after sixty seconds on our website, and is that conclusion accurate?